Re: EXSLT 1.0 Proposed List

On Tuesday 14 February 2006 16:32, Shaun McCance wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 08:36 -0700, Bruce Rindahl wrote:
> > I agree.  For instance Mozilla has indicated they would like to
> > implement EXSLT but not XSLT 2.  I don't know what libxml2 is thinking
> > (this is the PHP version of XLST).  Even Microsoft is currently on the
> > fence on implementing XSLT 2.
>
> I've talked with Daniel about this before.  He's currently
> working in the desktop group at Red Hat, so any work that
> goes into libxml2/libxslt is done purely in his free time,
> or by other contributors.  He has no plans at this time to
> implement XPath 2 or XSLT 2, although he is open to others
> doing it in libxml2 and libxslt.
>
> To get all the functionality of XPath 2 and XSLT 2, you
> need at least a subset of XML Schema processing.

That is correct, although I don't think it's that scary. What one need for a 
fully conformant XSL-T 2.0 Basic processor is to handle strings expressed in 
xs:boolean, xs:date, and so forth. One doesn't have to be able to read an XML 
Schema file or deal with anything in Part 1: Structures, which is where the 
big part of the W3C XML Schema-mess is(many would say, including me). In 
other words, it's sort of like XPath 1.0 + EXSLT's dates & times, it's just 
placed at the center of the core.

> The XML 
> Schema implementation in libxml2 has never been complete,
> and Daniel really isn't too enthused about working on it.

From my knowledge libxml2 is pretty good on Schema, especially the more recent 
releases. All Schema processors have problems with conformance with Part 1, 
partly because it's vague what conformance actually is.. But as said, that's 
irrelevant since an XSL-T Basic processor only needs to deal with simple 
values.


Cheers,

		Frans